Memory Alpha:Files for deletion
Image:Jupiter-station-insignia.JPG Image:Jupiter-station-insignia.JPG :Poor quality image and I'm pretty sure it's taken from the Star Trek Sticker Book. Deevolution 21:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC) :*'delete' or replace with a screencap of the symbol if possible . -- Captain M.K.B. 15:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC) *'Replace then delete.' AJ Halliwell 04:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC) Image:VulcanCapital2.jpg ;Image:VulcanCapital2.jpg : There are two images of the Vulcan capital city where, I think, one would suffice. The other one is Image:VulcanCapital.jpg. Of those two, I decided to bring this one up for deletion, because it is of lesser quality and at the moment only used on Vulcan (planet) (where a dozen images are too much already). I don't care about the exact image used. If this shot is considered better than the other, it can be uploaded using the other filename. -- Cid Highwind 16:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC) :Neutral.'Are we sure they're the same city? I don't remember the one from "Home" being identified as the capital, it was just an establishing shot for T'Les's house. - AJ Halliwell 04:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC) ::'Keep and Rename. Shows "residential" Vulcan, which we haven't seen elsewhere. - AJ Halliwell 17:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC) ::Keep, as we never found out if T'Les lives in the capital or not, and besides, what's the problem with having both images? Now that TOS Vulcan is changed in the remastered episodes, why not keep the images to compare? And if you want one of them in a larger size, tell me and I'll upload a larger version. --Jörg 17:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC) Hmm... If we can't even be sure that both images show the capital city, more reason to delete one of them. An image not showing the Vulcan capital shouldn't have a filename "VulcanCapital*.jpg" ;) -- Cid Highwind 23:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC) ::Yes, and then it should be re-uploaded as "Vulcan at dawn.jpg" or something similar. Seriously, I don't see why we have to loose one of the images. They are quite different and distinct. --Jörg 07:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC) Basically, the whole story ist this: #I checked the article Vulcan, and found a bunch of images in an ugly sidebar table, also too much for the amount of text in the article. #Two of those images were apparently showing the Vulcan capital city. One of them also in use on another page, the other one just this page. #So, while rearranging images on the page, I decided to remove what I thought was a duplicate, and bring the then-orphaned image up for deletion. In the end, if the second image is not the Vulcan capital, and we have a place to put that image, of course it can be uploaded again. However, I think that the article "Vulcan" can not be this place, because I already had to temporarily move 9-10 images to a gallery at the end of the article since they had no real place in the article. :) -- Cid Highwind 17:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC) ::On that note, some of those images really don't need to be there. Earth doesn't have an image of every landmark and city we've seen on it, why should Vulcan? Most of them have articles of their own, linked to in the article. - AJ Halliwell 17:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC) Romulanhand.jpg ;Image:Romulanhand.jpg Personal use image. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC) * Delete. Although, I suppose it could be used for the thaloron device... - AJ Halliwell 14:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC) * Keep, possibly rename - we have no images of this device based on some simple searches of topics and images. --Alan del Beccio 03:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC) *'Keep' Definitely needs to be renamed, the focus is not the hand, but the device itself. The image is of good quality, it just needs to be renamed and used in a section.-Randomname 01:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC) Klingon weapon Photos They all come from http://www.klingonimperialweaponsguild.org The site has this Notice at the bottom: "This page is for personal, recreational and non profit use. *Klingon* is a copyright item and the property of Paramount Studios and the Estate of Gene Roddenberry. No infringement on those rights are intended. ''The Klingon Imperial Weapons Guild is an original concept of Ambassador Lady K'Zin (Capucine Plourde) and K'Daq Kasara (Richard Robin). Copyright 1997 - 2005. ''The "Forge at the *Heart of Kri'stak*" and *mupwI'* are original ideas of K'Daq (Richard Robin). Copyright 1997 - 2005. All knife images and articles are the property of K'Daq (Richard Robin) , K'Beck (Tim Coy) and the KIWG (unless otherwise indicated) and may not be used without permission." - :Well, if we want to keep them, then we could ask those people for permission. do we want to keep them? --Bp 01:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC) ::Good question. I am personally a fan of doing just screencaps, but many of these do not have a good screencap possibility. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC) :::If we NEED a shot of one of these, then get permission, but screenies are preferred. --''6/6'' ''Neural Transceiver'' 05:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC) ::::Has anybody asked permission to use these images or at least tried to look for actual screencaps? It's been over two months; we need to do something with these. --From Andoria with Love 10:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC) ::::: Moved from copyvio page, can we get these replaced with the best caps we can find and delete these? --Alan 02:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC) :::::: The images can be used on MemoryAlpha regardless of conditions set forth on the website as MemoryAlpha claims fair use (which "is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work" -Wikipedia) I guess a tag needs to be created though... MatthewFenton 22:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC) ::As has been said elsewhere, "fair use" is not blanket permission to use any and all copyrighted material. We do not feel that this falls under "fair use". --OuroborosCobra talk 23:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC) ::::: As well, screen caps would much be preferred, as well as some confirmation as to indicate proof of their existence. --Alan 00:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC) ::::::If someone wants to try to contact them to get permission, here are eMail addresses I found in the above link. ::::::K'Daq ::::::K'Beck ::::::Editor3000 20:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC) Image:Husnockship.jpg Despite the hint on the Husnock talk page, this image was added to the Husnock page, interestingly instead of the Husnock warship page, when evidently, the ship is in no way associated with either, and is actually, this ship, which already has a full plate when it comes to images. --Alan 07:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC) :OPPOSE I cite this script instruction from the episode script (found at Star Trek Minutiae): :27 INCLUDE MAIN VIEWER (OPTICAL) :''We see the gleaming hull of an immense and deadly-looking spaceship approaching Rana IV. We don't need to be told it's the ship that attacked the planet only weeks ago. :Latter on, Picard states that everything they have been shown is a "recreation". :With TWO points of evidence that the depicted ship is a Husnock ship, and NOTHING in opposition to that fact, I find there is sufficient evidence that the ship is a recreation (at least visually) of the Husnack warship.Capt Christopher Donovan 22:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC) :: AGAIN, I suggest reading talk:Delta Rana warship (where there are already 3 similar images already contained within the article) and talk:Husnock warship, both discussions indicate otherwise. --Alan 10:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC) :I HAVE read both discussions, and they are full of speculation about what the Douwd may or may not have done, but NOTHING in that discussion goes to show that the APPEARANCE of the ship is not that of a Husnock warship. On the other hand, we have the stated script intention that it IS the same type of ship (at least appearance wise), AND we have Picards "recreation" dialogue. I'll take those two real data points over any number of Talk pages of speculation.Capt Christopher Donovan 22:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC) The point, again being, that we already have 3 images of this basic design. --Alan 06:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC) Image:Nenebek.jpg low quality duplicate of Image:Nenebek_shuttlebay.jpg, though the former is better named. Deevolution 23:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC) :Just a general reminder to all, as I have noticed one or the other requirements for items posted here have not been fulfilled: Please remember to orphan images that are being considered for deletion, and as well, add a the template to the image. --Alan 15:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Tomographic imaging scans Three nearly identical images (one I just uploaded). *Image:Tomographic imaging scan.jpg *Image:Tachyon pulse convergence.JPG *Image:Anti-time distortion graphic.jpg Only one can stay... you decide. (Personally, I think it's between 1 and 3, as they are clearer than 2, but which is the clearest and most illustrative of all?) -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 15:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC) :i say delete the second and third images, the first is the best named and best quality - if a bit large. Deevolution 05:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC) ::I second the deletion of the second and third images. The color on the first image is more vibrant than any of the other pictures, providing the best pictures possible– Randomname 01:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC). Copyrighted actor images ;Image:Robertbeltran.jpg, Image:Michael Dorn.jpg, Image:Robbie McNeill.jpg, Image:Bob Picardo.jpg, Image:Tim Russ.jpg, Image:G Wang.jpg, Image:Ethan Philips.jpg, Image:Jennifer Lien.jpg: Copyrighted images which I doubt we have permission to use at the moment. If we do, it doesn't say such. (No, just slapping an fair use tag on it doesn't do the trick.) If we can get permission within 7 days, then fine; if not, they should be deleted. If I missed some, please add them to the list. --From Andoria with Love 01:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC) :Nowhere on any of the source pages are copyright restrictions given on these images. I was very careful to select images from pages that that had NO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS ON IMAGE USE, or any kind of image use policy at all. I checked and double checked, reading all fine print and Terms of Use where present. In fact, in my search, there were many I rejected for the reason of copyright restrictions, such as from robertduncanmcneill.com. Others, like scifipedia.com I rejected for even a HINT of said restriction. This was a whole afternoon's work! Why should they be deleted??? – Orr6000 01:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC) ::Okay, okay, calm down, lol! If there are no copyright restrictions on the images, then that should be taken into account by those voting. With no restrictions, we can probably keep the images, so long as they don't violate any of our own copyright policies, particularly the CCL. Before voting, users can check out the sources themselves and see if they violate our own policies. Being on the images for deletion page isn't a guaranteed death sentence, hence why the images were not removed from their respective pages. If there's no copyright on the images and if they do not violate our own policies, then I see no reason why they can't be kept. That's what this is here to determine. --From Andoria with Love 04:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC) :::Delete. Not because of any copyright reasons but just because, I presonally, don't see the need of those images. Some of them are 8 years old now. Sorry. --Jörg 07:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC) : KEEP. The reason why I spent so much time on this is that it is my conviction that, for the completeness of a performer article, there must be an image of the actor/actress, if possible. The article is about him/her, not about the character he/she played. if you have an article about T'Pol, then an image of the character of T'Pol should the main image. But, if you are writing about JOLENE BLALOCK, then the main image should be of her, not T'Pol. There should be an official statement of policy on this issue of whether actor images are allowed. But right now there is none, and it is extremely unfair after the uploader worked so hard on this, putting in so much time and effort, to delete the images simply because of personal opinion that they are unnecessary. That is wrong.– Orr6000 13:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC) ::Orr6000's Jolene Blalock image isn't up for deletion, nor should it be (it's from a Star Trek production, like most other images on this site). I don't see any copyright page on the websites for the six images that are listed, so I'm not sure if we can keep them, as the photographers didn't release the images in any way.--Tim Thomason 21:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC) : "I don't see any copyright page on the websites for the six images that are listed..." Exactly my point! How can it be a copyright violation when there is no copyright or restriction? – Orr6000 11:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC) * Delete and Replace with images from Extra Features, if found to be necessary. While I understand that you worked hard on finding the images, that isn't reason enough alone to keep them. We've had several instances where someone would write like an (equivalent of) 40 page long essay on some Fanon space station, where we still had to remove it. But in regards to the copyright, just because they're on a website that doesn't list a copyright doesn't mean they're copyright free, unless the website took the picture. The one of Picardo and the tombstone for example I do believe came from a magazine, with a copyright (that I have around here somewhere...) Also, the main page of the site the Tim Russ image came from may imply that the image is in fact the copyright of the magazine/other they found it from. The point is, outside images like these the copyright is too cloudy to keep straight with so many sources. It seems to me, special feature images which are Paramount and already within the bounds of what we usually use is easier. - AJ Halliwell 16:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC) ::The Picardo image seems to be Copyrighted Jeffery Newbury/Outline Press - Gene Trindl, used in the "Special Collectors Edition: Star Trek 30 Years" magazine." - AJ Halliwell 16:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC) *sigh* Look..fine. it's obvious I'm not going to win this. Do as you wish.– Orr6000 21:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC) ::Actually, the Picardo image is also seen on the Voyager DVDs (assuming all of these are DVD caps as the site states). Also coming from the DVDs is the image of [[Tim Russ] that was up before the new version. So I'm gonna go ahead and revert the Russ image and upload some other images to replace most of those above (Beltran, Phillips, McNeill, Wang). --From Andoria with Love 21:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC) ::*Okay, I've reverted the Russ image and uploaded a new image for Beltran from the VOY DVDs (most likely Season 1), courtesy of TrekCore. I now vote to keep the Picardo, Russ, and Beltran, but delete unless they are replaced by images from the DVDs. --From Andoria with Love 22:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC) I think the immages of Robert Beltran and Robert D. McNeill should be deleted and replaced because they look like they would be more at home as prison photos. Doesn't the photo of Ethan Phillips look more like Kelsey Grammer or is it just me? Editor3000 20:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC) ::The green Robert Beltran is indeed from the Voyager DVDs, but the image is horrid. That is why I did not use it originally. DELETE. – Orr6000 13:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC) Image:Galaxy Quest poster.jpg We already have Image:Galaxy Quest is a production of Dreamworks.jpg. Not sure we really need to images from the film. --Alan 18:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC) :I think the promotional image we have better exemplifies the Trek spoofiness of the film (yes, I realize spoofiness isn't really a word -- bite me :P). Also, I don't think we need poster images for all the non-''Trek'' films we describe on the parodies page. Delete. --From Andoria with Love 02:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC) Image:Krenimcity.jpg already orphaned, duplicate of Image:KyanaPrime.jpg. Deevolution 03:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC) Image:Kirkapartment02.jpg Image:Kirkapartment02.jpg is almost the same Image:Kirk and McCoy.jpg.Replace the previous with the second one and then delete. – Tom 09:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC) Image:Madison.jpg It is not clear. And this is not Madison it is March and March has this one Image:March.jpg, so Delete. – Tom 09:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC) Image: Zoemclellan.jpg This is a COPYRIGHTED image from www.wireimage.com wireimage.com. I see no permission to use this image. True, the source page does not expressly forbid use without permission, but it does not say it CAN be used. My hard-sought images Robert Beltran.jpg, Robbie McNeill.jpg etc, which I worked a whole afternoon to find, fall into the same category, yet they get posted here for deletion within hours of my uploading them, but this stays untouched since 2005? I think not. Unless the poster owns the copyright, or Memory Alpha does indeed have blanket permission to use wireimage.com material, this image has to go. – Orr6000 13:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)